Principles of literary criticismRichards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Philosophy
Principles of literary criticism
Richards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Criticism
Upon the visual sensations of the printed words all the rest
depends (in the case of a reader not previously acquainted with
the poem); but with most readers they have in themselves no great
importance. The individual shapes of the letters, their size
and spacing, have only a minor effect upon the whole reaction.
No doubt readers differ greatly in this respect; with some, familiarity
plays a great part. They find it unpleasant and disturbing to
read a poem in any but the edition in which they first became
acquainted with it. But the majority of readers are less exigent.
Provided that the print is clear and legible, and allows the
habitual eye-movements of reading to be easily performed, the
full response arises equally well from widely differing sensations.
Those for whom this is true have, in the present state of economic
organisation, a decided advantage over the more fastidious. This
does not show that good printing is a negligible consideration;
and the primary place of calligraphy in the Chinese arts is an
indication to the contrary. It shows merely that printing belongs
to another branch of the arts. In the poetic experience words
take effect through their associated images, and through what
we are, as a rule, content to call their meaning. What meaning
is and how it enters into the experience we shall consider.
_Tied Images_.—Visual sensations of words do not commonly
occur by themselves. They have certain regular companions so
closely tied to them as to be only with difficulty disconnected.
The chief of these are the auditory image—the sound of the words
in the mind’s ear—and the image of articulation—the feel in the
lips, mouth, and throat, of what the words would be like to speak.
Auditory images of words are among the most obvious of mental
happenings. Any line of verse or prose slowly read, will, for
most people, sound mutely in the imagination somewhat as it would
if read aloud. But the degree of correspondence between the image-sounds,
and the actual sounds that the reader would produce, varies enormously.
Many people are able to imagine word-sounds with greater delicacy
and discrimination than they can utter them. But the reverse
case is also found. What importance then is to be attached to
clear, rich and delicate sound imagery in silent reading? How
far must people who differ in their capacity to produce such
images differ in their total reactions to poems? And what are
the advantages of reading aloud? Here we reach one of the practical
problems of criticism for which this analysis is required. A
discussion is best postponed until the whole analysis has been
given. The principal confusion which prevents a clear understanding
of the point at issue does, however, concern images and may be
dealt with here. It is of great importance in connection with
the topic of the following section.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account